UNASSIGNED: Existing reporting guidelines pay insufficient attention to the detail and comprehensiveness reporting of surgical technique. The Surgical techniqUe rePorting chEcklist and standaRds (SUPER) aims to address this gap by defining reporting standards for surgical technique. The SUPER guideline intends to apply to articles that encompass surgical technique in any study design, surgical discipline, and stage of surgical innovation.
UNASSIGNED: Following the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network approach, 16 surgeons, journal editors, and methodologists reviewed existing reporting guidelines relating to surgical technique, reviewed papers from 15 top journals, and brainstormed to draft initial items for the SUPER. The initial items were revised through a three-round Delphi survey from 21 multidisciplinary Delphi panel experts from 13 countries and regions. The final SUPER items were formed after an online consensus meeting to resolve disagreements and a three-round wording refinement by all 16 SUPER working group members and five SUPER consultants.
UNASSIGNED: The SUPER reporting guideline includes 22 items that are considered essential for good and informative surgical technique reporting. The items are divided into six sections: background, rationale, and objectives (items 1 to 5); preoperative preparations and requirements (items 6 to 9); surgical technique details (items 10 to 15); postoperative considerations and tasks (items 16 to 19); summary and prospect (items 20 and 21); and other information (item 22).
UNASSIGNED: The SUPER reporting guideline has the potential to guide detailed, comprehensive, and transparent surgical technique reporting for surgeons. It may also assist journal editors, peer reviewers, systematic reviewers, and guideline developers in the evaluation of surgical technique papers and help practitioners to better understand and reproduce surgical technique.
UNASSIGNED: https://www.equator-network.org/library/reporting-guidelines-under-development/reporting-guidelines-under-development-for-other-study-designs/#SUPER.

UNASSIGNED: Surgical technique plays an essential role in achieving good health outcomes. However, the quality of surgical technique reporting remains heterogeneous. Reporting checklists could help authors to describe the surgical technique more transparently and effectively, as well as to assist reviewers and editors evaluate it more informatively, and promote readers to better understand the technique. We previously developed SUPER (surgical technique reporting checklist and standards) to assist authors in reporting their research that contains surgical technique more transparently. However, further explanation and elaboration of each item are needed for better understanding and reporting practice.
UNASSIGNED: We searched surgical literature in PubMed, Google Scholar and journal websites published up to January 2023 to find multidiscipline examples in various article types for each SUPER item.
UNASSIGNED: We explain the 22 items of the SUPER and provide rationales item by item alongside. We provide 69 examples from 53 literature that present optimal reporting of the 22 items. Article types of examples include pure surgical technique, and case reports, observational studies and clinical trials that contain surgical technique. Examples are multidisciplinary, including general surgery, orthopaedical surgery, cardiac surgery, thoracic surgery, gastrointestinal surgery, neurological surgery, oncogenic surgery, and emergency surgery etc.
UNASSIGNED: Along with SUPER article, this explanation and elaboration file can promote deeper understanding on the SUPER items. We hope that the article could further guide surgeons and researchers in reporting, and assist editors and peer reviewers in reviewing manuscripts related to surgical technique.

暂无摘要。

There is considerable controversy regarding optimal management of patients with paraesophageal hiatus hernia (pHH). This survey aims at identifying recommended strategies for work-up, surgical therapy, and postoperative follow-up using Delphi methodology.
We conducted a 2-round, 33-question, web-based Delphi survey on perioperative management (preoperative work-up, surgical procedure and follow-up) of non-revisional, elective pHH among European surgeons with expertise in upper-GI. Responses were graded on a 5-point Likert scale and analyzed using descriptive statistics. Items from the questionnaire were defined as \"recommended\" or \"discouraged\" if positive or negative concordance among participants was > 75%. Items with lower concordance levels were labelled \"acceptable\" (neither recommended nor discouraged).
Seventy-two surgeons with a median (IQR) experience of 23 (14-30) years from 17 European countries participated (response rate 60%). The annual median (IQR) individual and institutional caseload was 25 (15-36) and 40 (28-60) pHH-surgeries, respectively. After Delphi round 2, \"recommended\" strategies were defined for preoperative work-up (endoscopy), indication for surgery (typical symptoms and/or chronic anemia), surgical dissection (hernia sac dissection and resection, preservation of the vagal nerves, crural fascia and pleura, resection of retrocardial lipoma) and reconstruction (posterior crurorrhaphy with single stitches, lower esophageal sphincter augmentation (Nissen or Toupet), and postoperative follow-up (contrast radiography). In addition, we identified \"discouraged\" strategies for preoperative work-up (endosonography), and surgical reconstruction (crurorrhaphy with running sutures, tension-free hiatus repair with mesh only). In contrast, many items from the questionnaire including most details of mesh augmentation (indication, material, shape, placement, and fixation technique) were \"acceptable\".
This multinational European Delphi survey represents the first expert-led process to identify recommended strategies for the management of pHH. Our work may be useful in clinical practice to guide the diagnostic process, increase procedural consistency and standardization, and to foster collaborative research.

To identify reporting guidelines related to surgical technique and propose recommendations for areas that require improvement.
A protocol-guided scoping review was conducted. A literature search of MEDLINE, the EQUATOR Network Library, Google Scholar, and Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations was conducted to identify surgical technique reporting guidelines published up to December 31, 2021.
We finally included 55 surgical technique reporting guidelines, vascular surgery (n = 18, 32.7%) was the most common among the clinical specialties covered. The included guidelines generally showed a low degree of international and multidisciplinary cooperation. Few guidelines provided a detailed development process (n = 14, 25.5%), conducted a systematic literature review (n = 13, 23.6%), used the Delphi method (n = 4, 7.3%), or described post-publication strategy (n = 6, 10.9%). The vast majority guidelines focused on the reporting of intraoperative period (n = 50, 90.9%). However, of the guidelines requiring detailed descriptions of surgical technique methodology (n = 43, 78.2%), most failed to provide guidance on what constitutes an adequate description.
Our study demonstrates significant deficiencies in the development methodology and practicality of reporting guidelines for surgical technique. A standardized reporting guideline that is developed rigorously and focuses on details of surgical technique may serve as a necessary impetus for change.

OBJECTIVE: To produce a best practice consensus guideline for the conduct of scrotal exploration for suspected testicular torsion using formal consensus methodology.
METHODS: A panel of 16 expert urologists, representing adult, paediatric, general, and andrological urology used the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Consensus Methodology to score a 184 statement pre-meeting questionnaire on the conduct of scrotal exploration for suspected testicular torsion. The collated responses were presented at a face-to-face online meeting and each item was rescored anonymously after a group discussion, facilitated by an independent chair with expertise in consensus methodology. Items were scored for agreement and consensus and the items scored with consensus were used to derive a set of best practice guidelines.
RESULTS: Statements scored as with consensus increased from Round 1 (122/184, 66.3%) to Round 2 (149/200, 74.5%). Recommendations were generated in ten categories: consent, assessment under anaesthetic, initial incision, intraoperative decision making, fixation, medical photography, closure, operation note, logistics and follow-up after scrotal exploration. Our statements assume that the decision to operate has already been made. Key recommendations in the consent process included the discussion of the possibility of orchidectomy and the possibility of subsequent infection of the affected testis or wound requiring antibiotic therapy. If after the examination under anaesthesia, the index of suspicion of testicular torsion is lower than previously thought, then the surgeon should still proceed to scrotal exploration as planned. A flow chart guiding decision making dependent on intraoperative findings has been designed. If no torsion is present on exploration and the bell clapper deformity is absent, the testis should not be fixed. When fixing a testis using sutures, 3 or 4-point is acceptable and non-absorbable sutures are preferred.
CONCLUSIONS: We have produced consensus recommendations to inform best practice in the conduct of scrotal exploration for suspected testicular torsion.

Hypospadias is the most frequent genital variation in male newborns with an incidence of 1:200-300. The variation within this anomaly is very high, from isolated distal hypospadias to very complex penoscrotal cases with accompanying genital or nongenital anomalies, genetic anomalies or even disorders of sexual differentiation. In the literature one can find up to 250 different surgical techniques for hypospadias repair. The goal of the new S2k guideline on hypospadias (AWMF registry no. 006-026), developed by the German Association of Urology (DGU) and the German Association of Pediatric Surgery (DGKCH), was a certain standardisation of the preoperative diagnostic workup, the surgical management and the postoperative care of patients with distal, middle or proximal hypospadias. In this article, the most important facts of the guideline are presented using a fictional case of an infant with distal hypospadias. For further reading, we refer to the S2k guideline, which can be easily accessed by scanning the pictured QR code.
UNASSIGNED: Die Hypospadie ist mit einer Inzidenz von 1:200–300 die häufigste Fehlbildung bei männlichen Neugeborenen. Dabei ist die Variabilität der Ausprägung sehr hoch, von einer isolierten distalen Hypospadie bis hin zu komplexen penoskrotalen Hypospadien mit begleitenden genitalen oder nicht-genitalen Anomalien und ggf. auch genetischen Anomalien und Störungen der Geschlechtsentwicklung. In der Literatur finden sich bis zu 250 verschiedene operative Verfahren zur Korrektur einer Hypospadie. Die Zielsetzung der hier anhand eines Fallbeispiels präsentierten S2k-Leitlinie für Hypospadie (AWMF-Register Nr. 006-026 [Arbeitsgemeinschaft Medizinisch-Wissenschaftlicher Fachgesellschaften]), herausgegeben von der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Urologie e. V. (DGU) und der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Kinderchirurgie e. V. (DGKCH), ist eine Standardisierung der präoperativen Diagnostik, des operativen Vorgehens und der postoperativen Behandlung sowie der Nachsorge bei distalen, mittleren und proximalen Hypospadien. Anhand eines fiktiven Falles einer distalen Hypospadie sollen die wichtigsten Punkte der Leitlinie anschaulich dargestellt werden. Zur Vertiefung der Thematik verweisen wir auf die Leitlinie, die mittels abgebildeten QR-Codes direkt aufgerufen werden kann.

BACKGROUND: The field of neurostimulation for the treatment of chronic pain is a rapidly developing area of medicine. Although neurostimulation therapies have advanced significantly as a result of technologic improvements, surgical planning, device placement, and postoperative care are of equal importance to optimize outcomes. This Neurostimulation Appropriateness Consensus Committee (NACC) project intends to provide evidence-based guidance for these often-overlooked areas of neurostimulation practice.
METHODS: Authors were chosen based on their clinical expertise, familiarity with the peer-reviewed literature, research productivity, and contributions to the neuromodulation literature. Section leaders supervised literature searches of MEDLINE, BioMed Central, Current Contents Connect, Embase, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and PubMed from the last NACC publication in 2017 to the present. Identified studies were graded using the United States Preventive Services Task Force criteria for evidence and certainty of net benefit. Recommendations are based on evidence strength and consensus when evidence was scant.
RESULTS: This NACC project provides guidance on preoperative assessment, intraoperative techniques, and postoperative management in the form of consensus points with supportive evidence. These results are based on grade of evidence, strength of consensus, and expert opinion.
CONCLUSIONS: The NACC has given guidance for a surgical plan that encompasses the patient journey from the planning stage through the surgical experience and postoperative care. The overall recommendations are designed to improve efficacy and the safety of patients undergoing these neuromodulation procedures and are intended to apply throughout the international community.

BACKGROUND: Split fractures of the humeral greater tuberosity (HGT) are common injuries. Although there are numerous surgical treatments for these fractures, no classification system combining clinical and biomechanical characteristics has been presented to guide the choice of fixation method.
METHODS: We created a standardised fracture of the HGT in 24 formalin-fixed cadavers. Six were left as single-fragment fractures (Group A), six were further prepared to create single-fragment with medium size full-thickness rotator cuff tear (FT-RCT) fractures (Group B), six were cut to create multi-fragment fractures (Group C), and six were cut to create multi-fragment with FT-RCT fractures (Group D). Each specimen was fixed with a shortened proximal humeral internal locking system (PHILOS) plate. The fixed fractures were subjected to load and load-to-failure tests and the differences between groups analysed.
RESULTS: The mean load-to-failure values were significantly different between groups (Group A, 446.83 ± 38.98 N; Group B, 384.17 ± 36.15 N; Group C, 317.17 ± 23.32 N and Group D, 266.83 ± 37.65 N, P < 0.05). The load-to-failure values for fractures with a greater tuberosity displacement of 10 mm were significantly different between each group (Group A, 194.00 ± 29.23 N; Group B, 157.00 ± 29.97 N; Group C, 109.00 ± 17.64 N and Group D, 79.67.83 ± 15.50 N; P < 0.05). These findings indicate that fractures with a displacement of 10 mm have different characteristics and should be considered separately from other HGT fractures when deciding surgical treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: Biomechanical classification of split fractures of the HGT is a reliable method of categorising these fractures in order to decide surgical treatment. Our findings and proposed system will be a useful to guide the choice of surgical technique for the treatment of fractures of the HGT.

UNASSIGNED: The reporting of surgical techniques is of mixed quality, with most at a very minimal level. Reporting guidelines that could be applied to guide surgical technique reporting vary in methodology for development, discipline coverage, dimension coverage and detail requested. However, a scoping review that could indicate the gaps and efforts needed in surgical technique reporting guidelines is lacking and warranted. This study aims to design a methodological rigour protocol to guide the development of a scoping review of surgical technique reporting guidelines.
UNASSIGNED: This protocol is designed following the 2020 manual proposed by the Joanna Briggs Institute. To further ensure the soundness of the protocol, we also included multidisciplinary professionals (including methodologists, clinicians, and journal editors) to refine the protocol.
UNASSIGNED: Seven key steps for developing the scoping review are identified and presented in detail, including (I) identifying the research questions; (II) inclusion criteria; (III) search strategy; (IV) source of evidence selection; (V) data extraction; (VI) analysis of the evidence; and (VII) presentation of the results. Guided by this protocol, the subsequent scoping review will inform us the overview of surgical technique reporting guidelines and precisely guide our direction and next steps in improving surgical technique reporting guidelines.
UNASSIGNED: This protocol is not registered as the PROSPERO database only accepts registration of systematic review protocols while does not accept registration of scoping review protocols.